Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2018 Week 04 Hansard (Thursday, 12 April 2018) . . Page.. 1354 ..

their first home, on older Canberrans on fixed incomes who have recently downsized, and on young Canberran families who are finding the increasing costs of living a burden.

These changes have an unfair and disproportionate impact on young people, the elderly and lower income tenants. That is all fact, and I commend Ms Lee and Miss Burch for doing their job and encouraging Canberrans to have their say. It is because of the arrogance, apathy and complacency of those opposite that so many people are feeling the hurt and hardship of living in this city. People like the 91-year-old war widow who cannot afford to live in Canberra are the people we should be seeking to hear from in this inquiry.

As a result of soliciting submissions and encouraging people to have their say, we heard comments such as this:

I am recently retired. I am on a small but manageable pension, just on the limit of a Centrelink payment, so my pension is significantly eroded by the increase in rates. My pension is supplemented by a self-managed super fund which relies on income derived from property rental income. This too is significantly eroded by the substantial increase in land tax and rates.

We also heard this from Peter and Thelma:

Upon writing to complain to our member, we felt the answer said, ‘Too bad. This is the new methodology, and there will be further rate rises next year.’ The over $600 rate rise in one year was firstly a surprise, secondly a shock, and thirdly exceptionally unreasonable.

These are the voices that came in through have your say. These are the voices that, incidentally, it seems the public accounts committee authorised for publication. I am very pleased that the committee did authorise those for publication because these people are having their voices heard as a result of the have your say website.

Ms Cody’s motion yesterday was a pretty cheap shot. The inclusion of (2)(c) and (2)(f) is outrageous, and we all know the slur that it was intended to create. Everybody on that side who signed up to that should be ashamed of themselves. That is totally inappropriate, and you all know it. The only reason it was included was because of the deliberate misinterpretation that would take place. That was known and that was disgraceful.

I find it interesting that Ms Cody is the person who raises this issue. Of course, Ms Cody has had some interesting form in this place in her short time here. It has been well litigated in the Assembly and externally. It is an interesting synergy with the war widow that I mentioned earlier. The Canberra Liberals do not for one moment regret asking people to have their say. What is more, we spoke to the Clerk before doing that. Before setting up the have your say rates inquiry, we chatted with the Clerk.

In addition it is interesting that there is a very strong precedent with regard to the insecure work inquiry by UnionsACT. A quick glance at the submissions on that page shows several submissions that include this end note:

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video